Protestants and Zionism, an Old Question Resurfaces

For those in the area and interested in the Mideast, there’s a good panel discussion tomorrow sponsored by the Middle East Policy Council on Capitol Hill. I’m participating, and going to be putting some emphasis on the new weakness of the Israel Lobby, and what that portends for the future. But I’d go especially to hear Paul Pillar, who knows about ten times more about the region than just about anyone I know.

I plan there to touch briefly on the upsurge of mainline Protestant activity concerning the region, perhaps epitomized by this letter written by leaders of several denominations, calling upon Congress to explore whether Israel is in compliance with US laws when it uses US weapons against Palestinian civilians. The letter is part of new wave of Protestants overcoming their natural tendency to keep quiet about Israel and Palestine, a welcome development.

Boatloads of ink have been spilled about the black-Jewish alliance of the ’60s, and its eventual fracturing. But the alliance between mainline establishment Protestant liberalism and reform Judaism was, I believe, more important: it practically defined the liberal estabishment, which is still all powerful if you believe some conservatives, and certainly set the dominant tone in the ’60s and ’70s. Jews and Protestant liberals acted as blood brothers over civil rights, and in opposing the Vietnam war, and not so incidentally, opposing anti-Semitism–and this alliance was critical to the forging of the post-Eisenhower American elite consensus.

But now it’s in the process of breaking, or is already broken–essentially over Israel’s continued occupation of the West Bank and denial of political rights to the Palestinians. If you follow the comments directed at Protestants in the link above, you could certainly get the impression that some commenters don’t have a very high regard for their former allies.

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

Hide 9 comments

9 Responses to Protestants and Zionism, an Old Question Resurfaces

The problem with mainline Protestants on this issue it that their concerns likely reflect their generalized liberalism more than they do serious theological objections to the theology that underlies Christian Zionism. It’s hard to make serious eschatological arguments based on Scripture when you just got done endorsing homosexuality or whatever. In my experience the best Christian critique of Christian Zionism comes from conservative Reformed (Calvinist) Christians.

As one who has followed this trend as a minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Scott, I concur in your assessment. But rather than breaking from reform and liberal Judaism in this regard, isn’t it true that what is happening in liberal Protestantism to embolden its adherents to separate from the cause of militant Zionism and the current government of the Israeli state also happening in the American Jewish community?

The right in Israel and many conservatives in the US understand that the Muslims are not ready to accept a Jewish State in the region as legit even within modified 1967 borders. Reform Jews and other liberal groups seem to me not realize that relinquishing land is seen as weakness, and does nothing to further peace in the region.Israel has it’s own leftists who would rather have no Jewish State than a flawed one. That attitude is far more of a potential danger than mainline Protestant churches who have been critical of Israel for many years. The Evangelical churches have been steady in their support for the Jewish State, and seem to understand that the choice is to rule over a people who in the majority want you gone or dead, or to commit Nat’l suicide.Under trying circumstances Israel does a fine job. While not Zionists many if not most Palestinians living in Israel would prefer to remain there, even if a Palestinian State were established.The mainstream Protestant churches may see things differently but I believe Israel and it’s supporters will remain strong and with God’s help continue to prosper and fulfill their missions for the benefit of mankind

Of course those religious figures who are criticizing Israel are gonna come in for some big-time slamming now by Israeli partisans, so I think it’s important to remember that the foundation of their criticisms are just free-floating things. Instead they make it very clear that it’s a matter of whether the aid to Israel they address isn’t just actually being used contrary to U.S. *law.*

And one bigger thing I’d like to remind those signers of, under U.S. law I don’t think we ought legally be able to give Israel any aid. Any country with nukes and not a member of the NPT are banned from getting our aid if I’m not mistaken.

Same is not just airy/marginally relevant either: We’re being urged to start a war over Iran’s supposed when Israel not only won’t talk about a Nuke-Free Mideast Accord (which Iran has already agreed to sign).

Seems to me the religios oughta *really* pay that issue some attention.

Re: “Jews and Protestant liberals acted as blood brothers . . .” – why not “Jewish and Protestant liberals”? A subtle point (or dog whistle), but I find it interesting that Protestants get a qualification, but Jews do not, as if there are many types of Protestants, but only Jews qua Jews. The Jew-lumping tendency also prevents the author from noting, or noticing, that many reform Jews are, albeit at an understandably slower pace, coming to the same conclusions as liberal Protestants, since they more or less share the same theology (see: Beinart, J-Street, etc). My point is not to boringly take offense at bias, but to point out how bias can hinder thoughtful analysis.

Of course none of the Reformers believed in premillenialism of any stripe–Luther, Calvin,Zwingli…
Specifically Zionist-oriented millenialism,
“dispensationalism” would be even more objectionable to them.

@Ben, sorry, my lazy formulation and you’re right. But I’d point out that a much greater preponderance of the Jewish community was liberal in those days–at least in terms of the relevant issues. They were New Dealers, supporters of civil rights, overwhelmingly opposed to the Vietnam war. Neoconservativism had not yet been created, though of course the sentiments it tapped into were latent. So you are left with a relative handful of Jewish rightwingers, Roy Cohn sorts, plus, I suppose many of the ultra-orthodox.